Re: Principle of equivalence
- From: rbwinn <rbwinn3@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 23:31:20 -0700 (PDT)
On Apr 18, 10:29�pm, Eric Gisse <jowr...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Apr 18, 9:14�pm, Bryan Olson <fakeaddr...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
rbwinn wrote:
Well, in the first place, Bryan, there is no way to know for certain
what the Lorentz equations say with regard to where a clock thrown
from a moving frame of reference will hit just by saying it was thrown
from the frame of reference.
"In the first place" you posted wrong or nonsensical statements on
what the Lorentz transform predicts. In the second place, I did the
math you challenged me to do, and showed the result for which you
asked. We're not in the first place anymore, nor the second. Now you
are changing the question because the theory you do not like turned
out to work in the first place, contrary to your reporting.
So if I say that a clock is thrown from
the moving frame of reference in the opposite direction to the motion
of the frame of reference at half the velocity of the frame of
reference, then does that clock hit in S at x=0?
What a mess. I assume you mean it is thrown from the train such
that in our frame of reference S its velocity is v/2, or in S'
its velocity is -v/2.
No, I do not think so.
Did anyone say it would in that case? If so, who?
�So how do you figure out where it hits in S using the Lorentz
equations?
The Lorentz transform expresses the S'coordinates of an event
as functions of the the S coordinates. In this case, we have
all the quantities relative to S, and you ask for "where it
hits in S". What's to transform?
If you want see the key bit of math showing that the Lorentz
transform supports the principle of equivalence, take the
transform's equations and solve them for x and t. The
transform expresses of x' and t' in terms of x and t; by
solving for x and t, you express them in terms of x' and t',
thus producing the inverse Lorentz transform.
--
--Bryan
No. The principle of equivalence states there is an equivalence
between uniform acceleration and gravitation - the principle you are
looking for is the principle of relativity.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Well, Eric, the principle of Equivalence would show that a cesium
clock thrown from a moving frame of reference S' with a velocity equal
and opposite to the velocity of S' would fall straight down in S and
would hit the floor at the same time another cesium clock dropped in S
would hit. That was what we were discussing. Principle of
Equivalence. No different from when Galileo dropped two different
sized lead weights from the leaning tower of Pisa. The only problem
you Lorentz equation people have is that from S, the clock in S' is
still in the air and reads t'=(t-vx/c^2)gamma when the S clock hits,
and from S', the S clock is still in the air and reads t=(t'+vx'/
c^2)gamma when the S' clock hits. Now here is my question: What does
each observer hear? Do they hear thump thump, or do they hear thump?
Robert B. Winn
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Principle of equivalence
- From: Eric Gisse
- Re: Principle of equivalence
- References:
- Principle of equivalence
- From: rbwinn
- Re: Principle of equivalence
- From: Bryan Olson
- Re: Principle of equivalence
- From: rbwinn
- Re: Principle of equivalence
- From: Bryan Olson
- Re: Principle of equivalence
- From: rbwinn
- Re: Principle of equivalence
- From: Bryan Olson
- Re: Principle of equivalence
- From: rbwinn
- Re: Principle of equivalence
- From: Bryan Olson
- Re: Principle of equivalence
- From: rbwinn
- Re: Principle of equivalence
- From: Bryan Olson
- Re: Principle of equivalence
- From: Eric Gisse
- Principle of equivalence
- Prev by Date: Re: Principle of equivalence
- Next by Date: Re: Decomposition of Intrinsic Spin Operator into Position and Momentum and Orbital Angular Momentum Operators
- Previous by thread: Re: Principle of equivalence
- Next by thread: Re: Principle of equivalence
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|